Perhaps "Fighter" and "Expert Fighter". Or "Professional"
That's what I'll use...
D&D 5E (2014) Legends & Lore Article 4/1/14 (Fighter Maneuvers)
- Thread starter Thaumaturge
- Start date
Perhaps "Fighter" and "Expert Fighter". Or "Professional"
That's what I'll use...
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Sounds hella sweet. Folks who aren't battle masters can just get +5 to damage and call it good. 
I'm happy that the "battle commander" role has been restored to the fighter class, and might be excited to play such a character for the first time in 5e. Pre-4e, it wasn't well supported, and in 4e, it came with inspirational HP baggage. As long as Rally does something other than directly heal HP, I'm looking forward to entering the world of giving other people my attacks and being all protagonist-y.
I think rather than disallow these things from everyone, they're more likely to treat it as a place for improvisation (STR checks and DEX checks) or a place for a module (a tactical module that gives folks more options). It's not that battlemasters are the only ones who can do X, it's that they get to do X reliably (and add their dice to it), whether or not the table is interested in EVERYONE doing X all the time.
I'm happy that the "battle commander" role has been restored to the fighter class, and might be excited to play such a character for the first time in 5e. Pre-4e, it wasn't well supported, and in 4e, it came with inspirational HP baggage. As long as Rally does something other than directly heal HP, I'm looking forward to entering the world of giving other people my attacks and being all protagonist-y.
Sardik said:
I think rather than disallow these things from everyone, they're more likely to treat it as a place for improvisation (STR checks and DEX checks) or a place for a module (a tactical module that gives folks more options). It's not that battlemasters are the only ones who can do X, it's that they get to do X reliably (and add their dice to it), whether or not the table is interested in EVERYONE doing X all the time.
Why?
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad
He was hoping for a good April Fools Day article I think.
GMforPowergamers
Legend
Or he was worried this was one
Giltonio_Santos
Hero
I expect all characters will be able to do these things as generic action choices. I expect the fighter to be able to do those things and deal a lot of damage at the same time. Every character can punch, but the monk can punch with a better damage die and his dexterity modifier on top. The entire group can attack a surprised opponent, but only the rogue will deal sneak attack damage.
This is what I expect of fighter maneuvers: fighting skills are the basic skills that you build around to create other classes. If the fighter is the class that specializes in those skills, he doesn't need resources specifically designer to serve his purposes, he just needs to do those things described in the combat section, but better. How WotC will do that I don't know, but we certainly have a lot of good RPGs (OGL ones) that show the path.
Giltonio_Santos
Hero
I don't think it won't work, I'm just stating that a maneuver-based fighter needs to work within that specific frame to be desirable in my own game. If I need miniatures or long fights to make complex fighters relevant, we won't be using them.
Also, they'll have to use conditions in addition to damage, not instead of damage. Otherwise, as long as downing foes remains as the best strategy, they'll remain as a subpar option in comparison to pure damage types.
ExploderWizard
Hero
Li Shenron
Legend
He's the only one allowed to use the superiority dice mechanic to do those things.
Everybody else will probably just do some opposed ability checks, or use the grapple rules, or adapt some basic combat rule, something in general significantly less effective by design.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad
You should try it, without miniatures or a battlemat or anything like that. It works.
